Bill,
Contrary to what you might read, "Shakti" does not mean "energy", as in electricity, but rather "power". Shakti (power) carries none of our modern connotations of a strictly mechanistic force but rather points to what Shakta-s (shakti initiates) see as the intelligence(s) that actualize the cosmos and enact its unmanifest design. You seem to recognize that Shaktivada (shakti-ism) is a doctrine (-vada) that is quite separate from Advaita. It is a doctrine asserting that there is a universal power that manifests the cosmos and that it's actualizations are various all-constituting intelligences. Since these are intelligences, rather than insentient material forces, the further insight is that they are accessible to other intelligences (like us) and that there is a methodology for doing just this. That methodology is called Tantra and includes not only formulae for contacting these intelligences but also specific etiquettes for creating, maintaining and enhancing this contact. These intelligences are deva-s/devi-s the numinous presences that constitute and animate our body, along with our sense powers, mental operations and the functions of consciousness (chitta). All of these internal deva-s/devi-s are considered micro-processes of macro-intelligences that are massively awake and actively cognizant. They are the internal-external values that order, organize and interconnect the various subjective/objective strata of the universe. This, however, does not include Awareness (chit) which is a reality eulogized as Shiva, the auspicious One, the Presence-Awareness-Felicity that is the essence of all true identity. Sounds abstract but that's the cliff notes version for dummies like me. You may find it a mere iteration of what you already know but it never hurts of hear it again. Now I think I'll go have a beer. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, William Parkinson <ameradian2@...> wrote: > > > > Richard and Emptybill: Given my rudimentary knowledge at this point I am wondering if the both of you can clarify something. I went and looked up on Wikipedia about Sri Vidya. I thought that the basic shakti doctrine was as follows: Shiva is the static consciousness that pervades all things, while shakti represents (envisioned in feminine form) the dynamic form of consciousness. In essence, they have divided up the notion of Brahman. One is pure consciousness, static in existence, while the other is pure consciousness in its changeable phenomenal form? I thought all these divine goddesses were simply a manifestation of shakti. Is that not correct? > Cheers > Bill  > > From: richardjwilliamstexas willytex@... > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 3:04 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: How to pronounce the mantras > > >  > > > emptybill: > > All modern Western scholars of Shankara or Advaita > > firmly reject the claim that Adi-Shankara was the > > author of either Ananda-Larari or Saundarya-Lahari. > > > Maybe so, but as TMers we are not concerned with what > most Western scholars think about Shankara. > > It is a fact that all the Dasanami Sannyasins worship > the Sri Vidya and accept the Adi Shankara as the > author of the Saundarylahri. That's why at all the > Ammnya Mathas founded by Shankara you will find the > Sri Chakra ensconced on the mandir. > > Our Guru Dev was a Sri Vidya adherent and his master, > Swami Krishnaanada was a Sri Vidya practitioner. So, > we TMers have a direct connection to the Sringeri > Matha, through Brahmananda Saraswati. > > Bija 'mantras', by definition, have no semantic > meaning - that's why they're called 'mantras' > instead of being called 'words'. If the bijas were > Sanskrit words, there would be no need for a > definition of them, since their meaning would be > obvious to anyone who could read a Sanskrit > lexicon. > > So, let's review: > > In basic TM you get the single seed sound (bija) > and later the fertilizer; and you get the simple > set of instructions for the correct angle to dive. > > So, it has now been established that at least two > of the most sacred bija-mantras, out of the fifteen, > contained in the Saundaryalahari, are in fact, TM > bija-mantras. > > Read more: > > Subject: Guru Dev and Mantrayana > Author: Willytex > Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental > Date: December 17, 2003 > http://tinyurl.com/ykp6rhs > > On the origin of the TM bija mantras: > > "Bija mantras issued by TM are ''Sri Vidya'' bija > mantras. To be fair, I won't go into what they are, > but if one listens to all TM mantras, except for > 2, they are 2 or 3 syllable, and this is a very > important component of the technique..." > > Subject: Re: Guru Dev and "Sri Vidya" > Author: Billy Smith > Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental > Date: April 22, 2003 > http://tinyurl.com/ye8my2 > > "You are getting "warmer" when it comes to > understanding TM's origins with your posts regarding > the Shankaracharya tradition and its practice of > Srividya..." > > Subject: Re: TM: Siva Sutra > Author: James Duffy > Newsgroups: alt.meditation.transcendental, > alt.yoga, alt.meditation > Date: September 21, 2003 > http://tinyurl.com/yjwa2yr >
